THE EFFECT OF DRAG COEFFICIENT ON TWO TYPES OF FLUID

MUHAMMAD ALIF IRFAN BIN ABU BAKAR

MUHAMMAD AQIL DHAMIRI BIN MOHD NAZRI
NURUN NABILAH BINTI MOHAMAD SALMAN
NUR AFIQAH RAIHANA BINTI ABD RAHMAN

MALAYSIAN INSTITUTE OF CHEMICAL & BIOENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY

UNIVERSITI KUALA LUMPUR

JUNE 2020
 ABSTRACT

Drag coefficient is a dimensionless quantity that is used in designing

components such as in aircraft, trains and nuclear plants. Drag coefficient is used in
designing to obtain stability and safety. However, there are a few factors that need to
be taken such as the object's size and weight which could affect the drag. Theoretically,
drag coefficient is related to Reynolds Number by corresponding to the curved surface
of the object.

In this study, a few objectives were studied which were determination of

viscosity, drag coefficient and Reynolds Number, identification of fluids pressure
which varies with height and determination of the motion of objects in fluids which
depended on viscosity and density. The study was carried out with 2 different types of
fluid and 6 different spheres. The spheres were in different sizes, types and weights.
The spheres were dropped into 2 different vertical cylinders that contained hydraulic
oil and sodium hydroxide (saltwater) respectively.

Drag coefficient in hydraulic oil is higher than in sodium hydroxide. It showed

that the drag coefficient obtained depended on the viscosity of fluid. Furthermore, drag
force exerted by the fluid can be determined. As mentioned above, drag coefficient is
related with Reynolds Number. However, the study showed there was no direct
relationship between drag coefficient and Reynolds Number. Results showed that
velocity in hydraulic oil was lower than in saltwater. Thus, the Reynolds Number and
drag force were lower too because of the high viscosity. In conclusion, the study shows
that the factors found give impact to the drag coefficient and Reynolds Number. Thus,
hydraulic oil had higher drag coefficient than saltwater.

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
Title page i
Abstract ii
Table of contents iii
List of tables iv

Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Background Study 1
1.2 Objectives 4
1.3 Scope of Work 4
1.4 Significance of Study 4

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.1 Relationship between Drag Coefficient and Reynold’s Number 5
2.2 Salt water (seawater) 5
2.3 Hydraulic oil 6
2.4 Usage of Spheres as the free-falling particle 6
2.5 Procedures comparison 6

Chapter 3: Methodology
3.1 Materials and Apparatus 7
3.2 Process 8
3.3 Procedure 9

Chapter 4: Results and Discussion

4.1 Determination of drag coefficient 10
4.2 Analysis of drag coefficient against Reynold’s number (Re) 14

Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations 16

References 18

iii
 List of Tables

Table Description Page

3.1 Diameter and mass of spheres 9

4.1 Diameter and mass of spheres 10

4.2 Time taken by spheres from top line to bottom line (1m) 12

4.3 Specific weight and viscosity of liquid 12

4.4 Drag coefficient and Reynolds number of liquids 14

iv
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background study

Drag coefficient is defined as a dimensionless quantity that is used to quantify the resistance
of an object in a fluid environment. It is important to understand the fluid drag forces which
involve common fluid like air and water to design any kind of object such as aircraft, trains,
automobiles, and others. This enquiry needs to obtain stability and safety (Mallick & Kumar,
2014).

Drag force equation can be expressed as:

𝜌𝑢2
𝐹𝐷 = 𝐶𝐷 . 𝐴
2

Where,

𝐹𝐷 = drag force

𝐶𝐷 = drag coefficient

𝜌 = density of fluid

𝑢 = flow velocity

𝐴 = frontal area of the body

1
Drag coefficient is related to Reynolds numbers, Re. In this study, different sizes of the
spherical objects were used. Thus, Re Number corresponds to the curved surface (Mallick &
Kumar, 2014).

The equation is expressed as:

𝜌𝑢𝑑 2𝜌𝑢𝑟
𝑅𝑒 = =
𝜇 𝜇

Where,

𝑅𝑒 = Reynolds numbers

𝜌 = density of fluid

𝑢 = flow velocity

𝑑 = diameter of sphere

𝜇 = coefficient of dynamic viscosity

𝑟 = radius of sphere

There are a few factors that affect the drag coefficient value. Firstly, the object used in
the study. The spherical objects used in the study were of different sizes in diameters and
weights. Besides, the spheres have different surface roughness. The size and weight of spheres
affected the drag coefficient. The size of an object will create pressure variation around it that
form drag (Mohammed et. al, 2013). Next, the surface roughness gave different drag values as
the smooth surface of the object generated less friction than the rough surface of the object.
This is called skin friction (Factors that Affect Drag, n.d.). Lastly, different viscosity of the
fluid has different impacts on the drag. This is because higher viscosity gives higher shear
stress, that caused by the flow of the object pass through the fluid.

The major application of drag coefficient is on transportation such as aircraft, trains, ships and
off-shore structures. A detailed and precise calculation of Stoke’s Law, drag coefficient and
Reynold’s number is required to avoid any undesirable incidents. That is the reason why this
experiment needs to be conducted, in order for students to be familiar on how to calculate drag
coefficient and able to make comparison of different fluids.

2
This comparison is made between procedures in lab manual with procedure by Utexas
education (2020).

The similarities for both procedures were:

1. Start with weighting and measuring the spheres.

2. Record time taken for the spheres fall until marked distance in cylinder.

3. Calculate drag coefficient, CD and Reynold number, Re values and plot a graph CD
vs Re.

4. Repeat the procedure with different fluids.

The differences for both procedures were:

1. Calculation of submerged weight.

2. Calculation of CD by using different formulas.

3. Use of types and sizes of spheres.

From the comparison of methods, the chosen method has some advantages and disadvantages
for this study. The advantages are the method is simple and not time consuming. The method
is direct and the objectives can be achieved easily. When conducting the experiment, one does
not need to be a professional as the method is not hazardous and dangerous. This causes some
difficulty to compare as there is too many aspects to be compared.

3
1.2 Objectives

The purposes of this experiment were:

1. To determine the viscosity, drag coefficient, Reynold’s number of hydraulic oil and
salt water in room temperature.

2. To identify fluids exert a pressure that varies with height.

3. To determine the motion of objects in fluids and how it depends on viscosity and
density.

1.3 Scope of work

In this study, the equipment that will be used are two vertical cylinder tanks with the same
depth and diameter and spheres with various size, material and weight. Materials chosen for
the spheres are ceramic and steel. The tanks are filled with seawater (salt water) and hydraulic
oil respectively. The choice of fluids is suitable as it is easy to obtain with a low cost. The
experiment can be completed in only a few hours so it is not time consuming.

1.4 Significance of study

The importance of this study is to prove that the biggest steel sphere has the shortest time taken
to reach the bottom of the cylinder when the sphere is released into the salt water and hydraulic
oil compared to the biggest ceramic sphere. It is also important to determine the viscosity of
the fluid used in this study as it will affect the result of the time taken for the sphere to reach
the bottom of the cylinder

4
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Relationship between Drag Coefficient and Reynold’s Number

Scientists began studying different spheres as they discovered drag on a smooth sphere
did not remain constant as velocity or surface roughness changed. Research by Kleshnev
(2010) and Kensrud (2010) both claimed that the drag coefficient, CD, is defined by the drag
force, FD, and the shell velocity (v). However, the study by Sobieski (2008) indicated that drag
coefficient is determined by the value of the Reynolds number, the experiment began by
investigating the scale of Re in the basic model. In the resulting simulations, the overall range
of the Reynolds number was 0 < Re < 8150.

2.2 Salt water (seawater)

The Earth is covered by about 71% of water-covered and the ocean holds 97% of all
Earth’s water which is saline or salty water. Saltwater or saline water is water that contains a
significant amount of dissolved salts called sodium chloride (NaCl) (Swenson & Baldwin,
1965). According to Merry (2017), saltwater can be described as heavier than tap water. This
is because water solution that is highly concentrated in dissolved salts has greater density than
tap water. Besides, the maximum density of salt solution depends on formula weight of the
salt, natural solubility of the salt and temperature. But for Nigg, Mester and MacIntosh (2000),
water density can change depending on the mineral content of the water. In determining the
drag coefficient, one can reduce the drag by decreasing the velocity. Drag, density and viscosity
do affect the terminal velocity. Viscosity needs to reassure the tendency of the fluid to reduce
the velocity differences in the flow. It is supported by molecular motion (in gas) or collision
(in fluid) transport speed from fast to the slow-flowing area. Higher viscosity of the fluid
produces higher drag than thin fluid (Special Cases, 2008).

5
2.3 Hydraulic oil

Hydraulic oil is use in this experiment as one the non-Newtonian fluid for the sphere to
pass through. According to Mikhelf and Mahmood (2015) the drag force exerted by this non-
Newtonian fluid is greater than the drag force exerted by the Newtonian fluid. This is because
the velocity of spheres when passing through the non-Newtonian fluid are lower than the
velocity of spheres when passing through the Newtonian fluid due to the higher viscosity of
non-Newtonian fluid. However, the research study found by Yousif (2012) stated that the effect
of surface roughness of the falling spheres on the velocity is more than drag force of both fluids
as the difference of the viscosity between the two fluids are not very big.

2.4 Usage of Spheres as the free-falling particle

Ceramic and steel were chosen as the material of the spheres dropped into the liquid as
they provide two different surfaces and weights for analysis. There have been several studies
reporting the usage of spheres does determine the drag coefficient. Research done by Taniguchi
and Asano (1987) shows that the drag coefficient can be determined using coaxially arranged
solid spheres. This is consistent with the findings of Faroughi et al. (2020) that the accuracy of
calculation can be achieved by passing spheres in a space filled with Newtonian and non-
Newtonian fluids. In contrast, a study by Ramasamy, Shukla, and Filippov (2020) showed that
this experiment can also be conducted by studying the motion of a non-Newtonian liquid
particle, with a Newtonian liquid shell and dropped into a permeable medium.

2.5 Procedures comparison

The procedures in the lab manual begin with weighting and measuring the spheres. The
procedures stated by Utexas education also begin with the same step. However, the use of types
and sizes of spheres were different for both experiments conducted. In addition, the method in
lab manual and method by Utexas education both required calculation of drag coefficient and
Reynolds number and also a plotted graph of drag coefficient vs Reynolds number. Next, the
formula given for drag coefficient in the lab manual is CD = 8/3 r((γs-γf)/ρV²). It contradicts
with the research by Utexas education. The formula used by Utexas education is CD =
FD/pVt²A,

6
 CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Materials and Apparatus

The equipment needed for this experiment is:

1. A Vernier calliper,
2. Two transparent vertical cylinders,
3. A stopwatch,
4. A marker
5. Two valves.

Other than that, the following equipment is also needed in this experiment:

1. Two ceramic spheres (various mass and diameter)

2. Four steel spheres (various mass and diameter)

3. Salt water

4. Hydraulic oil

7
3.2 Process

In the study, the process involve a free-falling object, where the sphere balls is dropped
at a given height in a viscosity liquid. The free-falling sphere ball is involved in an accelerated
process called acceleration. Acceleration was defined by Sir Isaac Newton in the mid-
seventeenth centuries after the study of motion by Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) in the late of
sixteenth centuries which took him 20 years of studies and observation. Newton with his second
law of motion, defined acceleration is caused by a force (push or pull) acting on an object to
the mass of the object (Acceleration, History, Motion, n.d.). According to a lab manual by
Brock University, California, acceleration in this study caused the increasing in velocity and
drag force which when it reached equilibrium, a steady state value is determined called terminal
velocity. It reached terminal velocity as the procedure applied Newton’s Law of motion under
force balance on a falling sphere ball (Yuan & Lin, 2008).

The first step is to measure the diameter and weigh the spheres. This step differentiates
the spheres thus comparison can be made by the effect of diameter or weight of the spheres on
the drag coefficient. Both of these parameters have significant impact on a free-falling object
in a fluid as the resistance and gravity pull varies. Next, two vertical cylinders with 1 meter
markers each are filled with salt water and hydraulic oil respectively. Both are Newtonian
liquids with different density and viscosity. The acceleration of free-falling spheres are
observed as they pass the 1 meter mark. It is taken by taking the time taken of the spheres to
reach the 1 meter mark once dropped into the cylinder.

There are a lot of examples of free-falling such as parachutes, the propulsions of

spacecraft and even as simple as throwing a rock from a cliff. Advantages of this study to
measure the effects of free falling onto objects with variety shape and sizes. This way, risk can
be calculated and specific amendments can be made to ensure minimal damage to the object
and the safety of people working with it.

8
3.3 Procedure

The following procedures were carried out in order to determine the terminal velocity, to
analyse the phenomena of free-falling bodies in any fluid and to measure the drag coefficient
of spheres over several decades of particle Reynolds number.

First and foremost, 6 types of spheres were weighed and measured to obtain the values
of mass and diameter of each sphere. The data was recorded in Table 3.1. Next, the two
transparent vertical cylinders were filled with two types of fluid with different viscosities which
were salt water and hydraulic oil. The sphere was dropped one by one from the top of the
cylinders and allowed to fall to the bottom. Time was taken by using a stopwatch once the
sphere was released until it reached the marked level. After that, the sphere was ejected from
the cylinder by turning the valve outward and turning the knob downward. The procedure was
repeated with different sizes and material of spheres.

Table 3.1: Diameter and mass of spheres

Sphere Diameter, D (cm) Mass, m (g)

Ceramic 1
Ceramic 2
Steel 1
Steel 2
Steel 3
Steel 4

9
 CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Determination of Drag Coefficient

This sub-section discusses the determination of drag coefficient on two different type of fluids.
A total of six spheres with different materials, different diameters and different masses were
used in this experiment. All of the spheres diameters and masses were measured and were
dropped into the cylinder filled with two different type of fluids which are salt water and
hydraulic oil. The spheres travelled all the way down to the bottom of the cylinder and the time
taken for spheres to reach the bottom will be recorded as the time taken along with the measured
data of the spheres will be later used in the formula to calculate drag coefficient. Although
certain problems were encountered, the objectives of this experiment were generally achieved.

First and foremost, Table 4.1 shows the diameter and mass for six different materials and sizes
of spheres. The sphere that recorded the highest diameter (0.945 cm) and mass (3.46 g) was
steel 4 and it proved that this sphere was the heaviest sphere among six spheres in this
experiment. The results show different diameters and different masses recorded. This is
because all the six spheres have different diameters which resulted in different masses. The
reason to use different diameters and masses is to show that these characteristics will affect the
value of drag coefficient. By referring the overall data, it is obvious that steel sphere is heavier
than ceramic sphere.

Table 4.1: Diameter and mass of spheres.

Sphere Diameter, D (cm) Mass, m (g)

Ceramic 1 0.620 0.82
Ceramic 2 0.945 2.75
Steel 1 0.490 0.5
Steel 2 0.620 1.04
Steel 3 0.695 2.07
Steel 4 0.945 3.46

10
Furthermore, Table 4.2 illustrates the time taken by the spheres from top line to reach the
bottom line (1m). Based on Table 4.2, it is observed that steel 1 obtained the highest time taken
to fall until marked level for both types of liquid in the cylinder due to its material, diameter
and also mass. Different time taken were recorded showed that the different diameters and
masses of spheres resulted in different speed when the spheres travelled down the cylinder.
Thus, the time taken was very short due to the short distance travelled by the spheres as the
length of cylinder used is only 1 meter. Therefore, there were errors in the results as the human
reaction time was included. The results on the time taken for the steel spheres to reach the
bottom of the cylinder were shorter compared to the time taken for the ceramic spheres to reach
the bottom of the cylinder. This obviously indicates that steel spheres travel faster in the
cylinder than ceramic spheres due to the heavier mass of steel spheres. This statement can be
supported by the theory of momentum. According to Tenne-Sens (2014), the momentum are
affected by mass and velocity. Therefore when the mass is increase, the momentum will also
increase which resulted in the increase of velocity. If considering the logical thoughts, the
results and theory stated, the time taken recorded for each sphere is accurate because a heavy
object will fall speedily and the velocity is higher compare to the light object. Thus, the spheres
also will drop easier in salt solution than hydraulic oil because a low viscosity liquid requires
less power to pump than a high viscosity one. Although some errors might have occurred
during time was taken, it appears that generally the data obtained was following the theory
stated above, regarding the correlation between mass and momentum.

11
 Table 4.2: Time taken by the spheres from top line to bottom line (1m)

Liquid 1 Liquid 2
Sphere Time, t (s) Time, t (s)
1 2 1 2
Ceramic 1 2.06 1.74 0.7 0.72
Ceramic 2 1.22 1.20 0.65 0.6
Steel 1 1.91 1.91 0.73 0.7
Steel 2 1.29 1.28 0.61 0.62
Steel 3 1.00 1.09 0.56 0.55
Steel 4 0.86 1.00 0.51 0.53

Moreover, the outcome of specific weight and viscosity of both liquids (see Table 4.3)
are 1250 g with 3.4393 for hydraulic oil and 1190 g with 1.9246 for NaCl. The spheres will
drop roughly in hydraulic oil than NaCl because the hydraulic oil was thicker and sticky
compared to NaCl. Two different value of viscosity recorded. This is because two different
type of fluids were used in this experiment. Therefore, the specific weight recorded were also
different as the viscosity affect the value of specific weight of the fluids. The specific weight
of hydraulic oil is higher than salt water. This is because hydraulic oil has higher value of
viscosity than salt water. The friction is greater in hydraulic oil than salt solution, which means
the viscosity for hydraulic oil must be higher than salt solution.

Table 4.3: Specific weight and viscosity of liquid

Liquid Specific Weight Viscosity (cP)

Hydraulic Oil 1250 3.4393
NaCl 1190 1.9246

12
 From all the result obtained, the value of drag coefficient was calculated by using the
formula given. The drag coefficient for hydraulic oil was 9.9787 and NaCl was 2.2749, as
shown in Table 4.4. The value of drag coefficient of hydraulic oil was higher than salt water
because the viscosity of hydraulic oil was greater than salt water. Therefore, it can be concluded
that higher viscosity will result in higher drag coefficient. The reason why the drag coefficient
of hydraulic oil was higher is because hydraulic oil exerts more drag force compared to the
drag force exerted by salt water. The correlation between viscosity and drag coefficient was
the force required to move the spheres until marked level. The value calculated is according to
the theory since the drag coefficient of hydraulic oil was higher than the salt solution. All the
value obtained lead to calculation of drag coefficient at the end of the result.

The conclusion that can be made based on the experiment is the value of drag
coefficient obtained depends on the viscosity of the fluid. The greater the viscosity of the fluid,
the higher the value of drag coefficient of the fluid. Other than that, it can be concluded that
the drag coefficient calculated tells us whether the drag force exerted by the fluid is high or
low. Drag coefficient has always played a big part in transportation such as airplane, train and
car. A force that come from the air will applies on a moving body so when the vehicle is
moving, it displaces the air (CarBike Tech, 2019). According to Bernoulli’s principle, air
travelling at a fast speed has a lower pressure and slower moving air. For example,
manufacturers applied drag coefficient principle to design and improve their cars’ drag
performance until it reach the best condition in term of speed, comfort and also safety. The
lower the value of drag coefficient, the more easily the vehicles slips through the air (Whiteley,
2017). Thus, decrease the air resistance of the vehicle and extent the use of fuel on vehicles
(CarBike Tech, 2019). It is very important due to relationship between speed and drag on the
car itself. That is why Bugatti Chiron has 300 hp more than its predecessor, the Veyron Grand
Sport Vitesse but can only manage 6 mph more in top speed (Whiteley, M., 2017).

13
4.2 Analysis of drag coefficient against Reynolds Number

This sub-section discusses the analysis of drag coefficient against Reynolds Number.
The Reynolds Number is a ratio of inertial forces to viscous forces which use as parameter to
predict the flow condition either laminar or turbulent (Connor, 2019). According to Connor
(2019) laminar flow is fluids that move along smooth streamlines because velocity is lower
(What is the, 2012). Thus, it has lower flow which the viscous force is dominant while in
turbulent flow the streamlines breakup and the fluid will move in an irregular manner because
the velocity is higher. In this study, the calculation of Reynolds Number was carried out after
obtained the value of drag coefficient. The equation used as stated in below:

𝜌𝑢𝑑 2𝜌𝑢𝑟
𝑅𝑒 = =
𝜇 𝜇

From the Table 4.4, the relationship between drag coefficient and the Reynold’s number
can be deduced. However, the determination of Reynold’s number still depends on the density
of the fluid. Firstly, the hydraulic oil has a density of 880 kg/m3 and the drag coefficient if
9.9787. By using the Re equation, the Reynold’s number obtained for hydraulic oil was 2.5962.
On the other hand, salt (NaCl) water has a density of 2160 kg/m3, drag coefficient of 2.2749
and the Reynold’s number was 20.2882. According to the results obtained, it showed that salt
water, even though with lower drag coefficient compared to hydraulic oil, has higher Reynold’s
number.

Table 4.4: Drag coefficient and Reynolds number of liquids

Liquid Drag coefficient Reynolds number
Hydraulic Oil 9.9787 2.5862
NaCl 2.2749 20.2882

14
The findings show that drag coefficient and Reynold’s number were not proportional. This is
because the drag coefficient of a fluid is measured by the object that pass through it and
Reynold’s number compares by the flow of fluid, the Reynold’s number increase when the
flow is turbulent and decrease when laminar flow is achieved.

From this analysis, it shows that the objective was achieved. The Reynolds Number in
different fluid with different viscosity have different drag coefficient as density of the fluids
both are different. There was no direct relationship between Reynolds Number and drag
coefficient. The acceleration of the free-fall object in hydraulic oil is lower cause it to have
low velocity. Thus, the Reynolds number and drag force were low. However, the acceleration
of the free-fall object in sodium chloride or saltwater was vice versa. Reynolds Number is
important in designing industrial pipe, mixer, and transportation. In aircraft industry, the
Reynolds Number plays a big role in designing the wing component. This to ensure that the
wing component able to resist high drag force and turbulent flow (What is the, 2012). It needs
to meet the demand, or the wing will crash in the air. Besides aircraft industry, Reynolds
number used to determine type of flow for designing pipe such as in nuclear power plant. Pipe
used needs to withstand the property of flow such high pressure and temperature (Connor,
2019). The design depends on hydrodynamic entrance length where in laminar flow, a
maximum hydrodynamic entrance length is 138 in diameter while in turbulent flow, the
hydrodynamic entrance length is shorter (Connor, 2019).

15
 CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

As indicated in the introduction, the objective of this experiment is to determine the

viscosity, drag coefficient, Reynold’s number of hydraulic oil and salt water at room
temperature. It is also mentioned earlier that the objective of this experiment is to determine
the motion of objects in fluids and how it depends on viscosity and density. Based on the results
obtained, it can be concluded that the objectives stated above were achieved. The results show
that both fluids has different values of viscosity, drag coefficient and Reynold’s number which
causes the motion of the objects to be different due to the different viscosity of the fluids.

The spheres used in this experiment recorded different time taken for it to reach the
bottom of the cylinder. The time taken in salt water was shorter compared to in hydraulic oil.
This is because the viscosity of salt water is lower than hydraulic oil which causes the motion
of spheres when travelled in salt water were faster than in hydraulic oil. From these findings,
the drag coefficient for both fluids were calculated. However, certain problems were founded
during the experiment. The time recorded was different from the expected results as the spheres
motions were very fast when it was dropped in the cylinder. The reason for this was the short
length of the cylinder used. Other than that, there could be an error on the results because some
spheres collided with the wall of the cylinder during the experiment. This occurrence will cause
the time taken to be affected. Apart from that, the objectives are still considered successful.

Furthermore, it is felt that these findings could lead to more types of fluids to be
explored as it is a lot easier to determine the viscosity of the fluids by carrying out this
experiment. These findings also contributed to determining other information on the fluids such
as pressure, density and many more. That extra information could be useful for further studies
on fluid mechanics.

The recommendation to improve the accuracy of data in this experiment is to be alert

when starting and stopping the stopwatch according to the sphere free falling on a certain level.
The eye level should be perpendicular to the marked level to avoid parallax error and the time
taken should be measured for several time to get an average reading. The other way to
overcome this problem is by installing an automatic stopwatch that is connected with the

16
cylinder to detect the falling of spheres once it is released at the top of the cylinder until it
reaches the marked level. Hence, this may improve the reading obtained by 100% accurate.

Due to the wide field of study, the application of drag coefficient in real life is not clear
in this experiment. It's only focusing on the calculation to get the value of drag coefficient and
Reynolds number instead of research in terms of application. Thus, it is highly recommended
to know the uses of drag coefficient in real life since it is used widely in that transportation
industry.

17
 REFERENCES

Acceleration - History - Motion, Newton, Force, and Seventeenth. (n.d.). JRank Science
& Philosophy. Retrieved from https://science.jrank.org/pages/8/Acceleration-
History.html

Factors that affect drag. (n.d.). Retrieved April 22, 2020, from
https://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/factord.html

Faroughi, S.A., Fernandes, C., Nóbrega, J. M., & McKinley G.H., (March, 2020). A
closure model for the drag coefficient of a sphere translating in a viscoelastic fluid.
Journal of Non-Newtonian Fluid Mechanics, 277.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnnfm.2019.104218.

H. Yousif. Experimental Evaluation of the Virtual Mass and Roughness of Solid Particles
Accelerating in Newtonian and Non-NewtonianFluids. Baghdad: University of
Baghdad, 2012.

Kleshnev, V. (2010). Boat acceleration, temporal structure of the stroke cycle, and
effectiveness in rowing. J Sports Eng Tech 233:63–73.

Mallick, M., & Kumar, A. (2014). Study on drag coefficient for the flow past a cylinder.
Ripublication.Com, 5(4), 301–306.
http://www.ripublication.com/ijcer_spl/ijcerv5n4spl_01.pdf

Merry, M. (2017). Why Is Salt Water Heavier Than Tap Water? Sciencing.
https://sciencing.com/salt-water-heavier-tap-water-8735703.html

18
Mikhelf W.K and Mahmood H.Y. (2015, December). Experimental evaluation of drag
coefficient for falling sphere in newtonian and non-newtonian fluid. Vol.
9. Baghdad: Baghdad University, 2013.

Nigg, B. M., MacIntosh, B. R., & Mester, J. (2000). Biomechanics and Biology of
Movement. In Human Kinetics.
https://books.google.com.my/books?id=1BG78utt6VUC&pg=PA57&dq=drag+co
efficient+on+saline+water&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjGrLCj47_pAhUylEsF
HVjxAFkQ6AEILzAB#v=onepage&q=drag coefficient on saline water&f=false

Ramasamy Selvi, Shukla, P., & Filippov, A. N. (2020). Flow around a Liquid Sphere
Filled with a Non- Newtonian Liquid and Placed into a Porous Medium. Colloid
Journal, 82(2), 152.

Sobieski, W. (2008). Drag coefficient in solid-fluid system modelling with the eulerian
multiphase model. Retrieved from
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07373937.2010.482714?mobileUi=0&j
ournalCode=ldrt20

Special Cases. (2008). Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

http://web.mit.edu/6.055/old/S2008/notes/apr30.pdf

Swenson, H. A., & Baldwin, H. (1965). A primary on water quality.

https://www.usgs.gov/special-topic/water-science-school/science/saline-water-
and-salinity?qt-science_center_objects=3#qt-science_center_objects

Taniguchi, I., & Asano, K. (1987). Numerical analysis of drag coefficients and mass
transfer of two adjacent spheres. Journal of Chemical Engineering of Japan,
20(3), 287–294. https://doi.org/10.1252/jcej.20.287

19
 Tenne-Sens, A. (2014). Momentum. AccessScience. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1036/1097-8542.432100

Utexas Education (n.d.). Dimensional analysis applied to drag force. Retrieved April 23,
2020, from https://www.caee.utexas.edu/prof/kinnas/319LAB/Lab/Lab%206-
Dimensional%20Analysis/6-DimAnal.htm

Yuan, P., & Lin, B.-Y. (2008). Measurement of Viscosity in a Vertical Falling Ball
Viscometer American Laboratory. https://www.americanlaboratory.com/913-
Technical-Articles/778-Measurement-of-Viscosity-in-a-Vertical-Falling- Ball-
Viscometer/

Format – 10

Illustration – 10

Abstract - 8

Mechanic - 7

Intro - 9

LR - 8

Method - 10

Result - 8

Conclusion - 10

Ref – 6

86/100

35/40

20